Apple targets unauthorized iPod web dealers
Apple's legal team this month is reported to be focusing on a group of unauthorized iPod and accessory Web resellers, demanding they cease from using the Apple-trademarked iPod name.
One UK reseller which called itself iPod Essentials is now in the process of changing its name to MP3 Essentials after Apple took legal action, citing trademark infringement.
"[Apple] has requested that the iPod accessories supplier cease trading under its current name and hand over the iPodEssentials.co.uk domain to Apple," Pocket-lint reported. A posting on the iPod Essentials Web site provides corroborating details.
The small reseller, which caters to approximately 2,000 shoppers each day, is reportedly concerned over the impact a costly rebranding will have on its profitability. In the last 18 months, the company is said to have spent over half of its marketing budget promoting the iPod Essentials domain.
Macworld UK adds that it has knowledge of Apple taking "similar activity against other accessories for iPod traders using the name in their domain, with many resentful of the move."
Similarly, Apple has recently acted to also prevent unauthorized iPod accessory manufacturers from establishing themselves in the iPod market.
In January the company introduced a "Made for iPod" certification (or badge) that iPod accessory manufactures can display to differentiate their Apple-authorized accessories from those that have not been approved by Apple.
Although Apple generates a reported 10% royalty kick-back from all products that sport the badge, the company says the certification is meant to protect consumers from a proliferation of low-quality and potentially hazardous iPod accessories hitting the market.
Earlier this month, Apple applied for a US trademark on its "Made for iPod" badge from the United States Patent and Trademark office.
One UK reseller which called itself iPod Essentials is now in the process of changing its name to MP3 Essentials after Apple took legal action, citing trademark infringement.
"[Apple] has requested that the iPod accessories supplier cease trading under its current name and hand over the iPodEssentials.co.uk domain to Apple," Pocket-lint reported. A posting on the iPod Essentials Web site provides corroborating details.
The small reseller, which caters to approximately 2,000 shoppers each day, is reportedly concerned over the impact a costly rebranding will have on its profitability. In the last 18 months, the company is said to have spent over half of its marketing budget promoting the iPod Essentials domain.
Macworld UK adds that it has knowledge of Apple taking "similar activity against other accessories for iPod traders using the name in their domain, with many resentful of the move."
Similarly, Apple has recently acted to also prevent unauthorized iPod accessory manufacturers from establishing themselves in the iPod market.
In January the company introduced a "Made for iPod" certification (or badge) that iPod accessory manufactures can display to differentiate their Apple-authorized accessories from those that have not been approved by Apple.
Although Apple generates a reported 10% royalty kick-back from all products that sport the badge, the company says the certification is meant to protect consumers from a proliferation of low-quality and potentially hazardous iPod accessories hitting the market.
Earlier this month, Apple applied for a US trademark on its "Made for iPod" badge from the United States Patent and Trademark office.
Comments
Meant to do both, more like.
And a third thing it's meant to do: promote the iPod accessory ecoystem (an important part of the iPod's success) by boosting sales for the vendors--via Apple spending some of that 10% to market the program and the products. Which they've begun to do, so they're holding up their end.
Originally posted by Glamingo
This is rediculous, Apple has gone to far. In my opinion, IpodEssentials and other names like it are fine. How do companys have the right to change the names of other ones.
They have the right because the other companies don't have the right to use the iPod name in the first place. It's copyrighted, so only Apple owns the use of that name. Try using the name "DisneyEssentials" for instance (even if selling something that Disney wouldn't object to in and of itself), and see how fast you get a letter from Disney legal!
Originally posted by nagromme
"Although Apple generates a reported 10% royalty kick-back from all products that sport the badge, the company says the certification is meant to protect consumers from a proliferation of low-quality and potentially hazardous iPod accessories hitting the market."
Meant to do both, more like.
And a third thing it's meant to do: promote the iPod accessory ecoystem (an important part of the iPod's success) by boosting sales for the vendors--via Apple spending some of that 10% to market the program and the products. Which they've begun to do, so they're holding up their end.
...and a fourth point...pissing consumers off, I recently was seeking a tape-to-minijack adapter for my car, they used to be ~$10, now the BASE PRICE is $20 and they all say "works with iPod!" Newsflash! they would all work with the ipod ANYWAY! why should I have to pay $25 of a product that I paid $10 for 2 years ago? just because it "works with iPod"?
GIVE ME A F-ING BREAK!!!!!!!
Originally posted by Project2501
I don't think increased price is because they are "iPod compatible", it's just because it's harder to sell one these days, who owns casette player anymore anyways
Quick question that's probably already been covered: To play my iShuffle through say, iTrip or iMini or whatever, so it runs through the cd/stereo radio- will that accessory work, and if not, what radio transmitter will? Cheers!
Originally posted by Project2501
I don't think increased price is because they are "iPod compatible", it's just because it's harder to sell one these days, who owns casette player anymore anyways
If the price had doubled or tripled since say...1999, you would have a point, but the price increases started with in the last ~20 months...and as to your last point...let me tell you who has cassette players...people who drive older cars and dont want to shell out ~$200 to put a new head unit in a ~$600 car...
Reasons I prefer cassette to FM transmitter
- cleaner, better sound than a cheapo <=$50 transmitter
- no need to fiddle with frequencies while I drive
- All my presets are used...and I am not willing to do without one
-works with anything else, say a buddies portable dvd player, or other MP3 device or PDA...
The best solution is a head unit with RCA inputs...but that aint gonna happen in this car.
Originally posted by a_greer
If the price had doubled or tripled since say...1999, you would have a point, but the price increases started with in the last ~20 months...and as to your last point...let me tell you who has cassette players...people who drive older cars and dont want to shell out ~$200 to put a new head unit in a ~$600 car...
Reasons I prefer cassette to FM transmitter
- cleaner, better sound than a cheapo <=$50 transmitter
- no need to fiddle with frequencies while I drive
- All my presets are used...and I am not willing to do without one
-works with anything else, say a buddies portable dvd player, or other MP3 device or PDA...
The best solution is a head unit with RCA inputs...but that aint gonna happen in this car.
Apple itself is only protecting the copyrights to the names of it's products. Any company (and MANY American companies do this!) sell the rights to an endorsement of a product other companies make to complement theirs. Apple is NOT alone in this! If the third party companies want to jump on a popular bandwagon like the iPod, license the Apple "Made for iPod" logo, and then pass on the cost to the consumer, then you can't blame Apple!
If, as a consumer, you don't like the cost, then buy something cheaper. Apple and the companies selling iPod accessories are targeting a part of the market where people have money to spend. A lot of people that can afford an iPod can also afford the accessories that go with it - including a Nissan or Mercedes that advertises the integration of their product to take advantage of the absolutely HUGE slice of the digital music market Apple now has.
I bought a Photo iPod last month. When I go back to my Nissan dealer in the fall to buy another car, it'll be one that is capable of integrating to an iPod. In the meantime, I bought a PodFreq. It gives me good music quality, while it will never equal the freq. range of my equipment at home. It's in a car, and I don't listen to music in the car for a premium music experience, it's just for occupying my mind till I get to where I'm going. If I want to listen to music for the musical experience - and i do - it's at home where I am not distracted by the demands of driving. And my iPod connects directly to my home theater system with cables that can deliver the full range I expect.
if you don't like it, exercise the power you have as a consumer - put your money where your mouth is. There's plenty of stuff out there; if you're serious about your music, you oughta be willing to spend the money to listen to it the way you want. Don't blame the equipment makers for responding to the market - that's what they're in the business to do.
I think they could have handled it better, and shouldn't have waited so long though.